Sniper round,Mauser vs Mosin Nagant


PDA






Tropical Z
August 11, 2005, 03:53 PM
Comparing mostly the round,as there could be too many differences between any two of these rifles.From a trajectory standpoint and downrange energy (say 300-1000 yards)how similar are 7.62x54R and 8mm Mauser?
And if you took into account a fine shooting example of a 91/30 and K98 what could the expected outcome be? :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Sniper round,Mauser vs Mosin Nagant" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
jefnvk
August 11, 2005, 04:22 PM
And if you took into account a fine shooting example of a 91/30 and K98 what could the expected outcome be?

A dead soldier.

I believe 8MM carries a bit more energy downrange, but not sure.

Eightball
August 11, 2005, 05:09 PM
A good comparison: watch "Enemy at the Gates". Equal guns, IMHO--I think it more depends on training, and the optics used to get those distances. Personally, I'd take the MN 91/30 (since hindsight is 20/20 :cool: )--older, cooler looking weapon, especially with that scope. And, have you ever seen the "ghillie suit" (sp?) rigs at gun shows for MN's? Sweet stuff :) .

TODD3465
August 11, 2005, 05:22 PM
Mauser, mauser, mauser.........

Much better optics, IMHO.

GD
August 11, 2005, 05:57 PM
The difference between a similar weight 7.62x54 round fired from a M91/30 and a 8mm round fired from a K98k rifle would be negligible. In either case, a well placed shot would result in jefnvk's response - a dead soldier.

Davo
August 11, 2005, 06:40 PM
Tropicalz, from what Ive read, the finnish mosins will outshoot decent mausers, and cost is about the same. The 8mm is slightly more powerful, but not much. Both rounds are plenty deadly at 300-1000 yards, though they are not as accurate as say a 308 or 300.
If you are looking for a great long range surplus rifle, you should check out the swiss k31. This rifle was basically made for long range shooting. They are very accurate, and the projectile fired is very slick. Ammo will cost more, but you can pretty much expect a sub 2moa rifle, with many doing 1moa. And with a scope, shooting well should be even easier.

cracked butt
August 11, 2005, 07:44 PM
Both rounds are plenty deadly at 300-1000 yards, though they are not as accurate as say a 308 or 300.

Both rounds are potentially as accurate as the .308 and .300WM, especially the 7.62x39. Edit:OOps, I meant 7.62x54R

The reason why you don't see the potential very often is that they are not common In north america- I.E noone builds rifles domestically in these chamberings, most of the ammunition fired is surplus, which is "good enough" for infantry but is not match grade, and vast majority of the rifles importd have a wide variation of groove diameters- pretty much always oversized for the bullet.

The opposite is also true. Cartridges like the 6.5x55 and 7.5 swiss have a reputation for excellent accuracy, probably more due to the far higher quality of rifle and higher quality of surplus ammo than anything else.

Davo
August 11, 2005, 07:59 PM
Since hes asking about the 7.62 x 54r (not x39 though my point still stands) and the 8mm, and fine shooting examples of a 91/30 and K98, im gonna guess he is looking to purchase a milsurp. Your right-out of certain rifles, many of which are commercial, these rounds may be very accurate. But in general (and hes a newb so lets not confuse things with exceptions), these milsurp cartridges are less accurate than the .308 or .300-and hitting a target at that range will be tough.
Im sure there is someone, somewhere with a 7.62x54r or 8mm that will outshoot the .308 and .300. In general they are in different classes-one due to a very efficient case design, the other due to its improved ballistics.
That said, id still love one of the cz bolt action carbines in 7.62x39. I hear the full potential of that combination is awesome.

Cosmoline
August 11, 2005, 08:37 PM
Actually, the 8x57JS and 7.62x54R are inherently as accurate or more accurate than the .308. The 57JS went out of favor after WWII in military circles, but it certainly did extremely well prior to that. And since it and its sister the 7x57 are the grandparents to the .308 and have the same basic design, there's little difference in ballistic potential. The 54R (and esp. the Finnish .308" 53R) is one of the most potentially accurate cartridges ever invented. The Lapua reloading manual cites the trophies taken home with the round, and notes certain features of the cartridge that give it great potential stability. Out of an accurized Finnish Mosin, esp. a 28/30, M-30 or M-39, it can be exceptionally accurate.

The K-31 is also very accurate, but the very best long-range C&R I ever owned was a Swiss 96/11, a true Schmidt-Rubin. It would give sub-MOA groups and did extremely well at 300 and 400 meters.

As far as a contest between say a fine Czech Mauser and a Finnish Mosin, the Finn would likely have the advantage because it has already been customized and accurized with shims and sometimes even bedding and a barrel sleeve.

Lone_Gunman
August 11, 2005, 08:51 PM
From what I have read, most of the "sniping" that occurred at Leningrad took place at less than 100 yards. So I don't think the rifle, or optics would make much difference at short ranges like that.

jefnvk
August 11, 2005, 08:53 PM
Just t throw out more options, if you are looking for a sniper rifle, there are still some Swede snipers floating around. Just as accurate as any Swiss or Finn gun, and the 6.5x55 is an awesome cartridge, my favorite.

Davo
August 11, 2005, 08:54 PM
Cosmo, its funny you mention the 8mm as being at least as accurate as the .308. Over the years it was found that the 30-06 (a long action cartridge) just plain couldnt shoot as well as the .308, all other things being equal. It was found that the shorter .308 case was more effiecient in burning powder, and more consistant. This pretty much ended the 30-06 being used as a competitive long range cartridge. The 8mm is actually the inspiration for the 30-06, again a long action cartridge with the problems that come with it. Are these cartridges accurate? Sure. Are they as accurate as the .308 in general? I dont think so.
I too have read of the 54r's achievments, but in general its not used as a long range round except in the few countries where its still in use. This is one of those exceptions that may be very accurate in a few rifles, but again this may confuse newbies.

cracked butt
August 11, 2005, 10:02 PM
Over the years it was found that the 30-06 (a long action cartridge) just plain couldnt shoot as well as the .308, all other things being equal.

That's true in gas operated semiautos. You would have to expend some serious $$ in a bolt rifle before the difference between a .308 and 30-06 becomes apparant.

Eightball
August 11, 2005, 10:55 PM
Over the years it was found that the 30-06 (a long action cartridge) just plain couldnt shoot as well as the .308, all other things being equal. Finally, someone else comes to the same conclusion :rolleyes: . Though, cracked butt is right--the difference would be negated in a bolt gun; so, go for the cheaper round :D

Cosmoline
August 11, 2005, 10:57 PM
The 8x57JS is actually closer to the .308 in dimension than the .30'06. The .308 is only a few mm's shorter and has the same head diameter. The .308 isn't much of an innovation. It's just a shrunk down .30'06, which in turn is just an elongated 7x57. So it basically just returns to the 1890's.

Part of the .308's advantage is that all the rifles chambered for it are post-war. The 8x57, 7x57, .30'06, 7.62x54R etc. have at least 100 years of rifles floating around from different nations. They all tend to have slightly different tolerances, dimensions, rifling twist rates, troat dimensions, ogive tolerances, material quality, etc. THe 7x57 is notoriously difficult to deal with not because of any defect in the cartridge but because there are variances from the old Mausers to the new Rugers and back again. What combinations shoot well in one rifle might not stabilize in another. The 54R is mired by variances between .308" and .311" or wider bores. But there's nothing magical about one cartridge or another as an inherent matter. If you start from scratch and can design the rifle from the ground up, any of these classics can be turned into absolute tack drivers. Heck even the .30-30 can be, as witnessed by some of the custom T/C hand and a half guns out there.

Gewehr98
August 11, 2005, 11:12 PM
Start with match-grade chamber reamers, a decent-quality barrel, and properly assembled ammo, and I'd wager one would be hard-pressed to find any difference in so-called accuracy between a .30-06 and .308 Winchester.

I've seen the "inherent" accuracy argument go right out the door when benchresters or accuracy buffs adopt a cartridge that isn't mainstream. Tweak a .30-30 Remington Model 788 and you'll get a real eye-opener, guaranteed!

I had a friend in Sacramento who shot matches with a bull-barreled 8mm Mauser target conversion. Of course, it had a Canjar trigger and Unertl optics, but his 8x57JS 198gr match loads in that rifle were something to behold when the scores came back from the pits. ;)

赤悪魔
August 11, 2005, 11:20 PM
7.62 x 54r I like this round over the 8mm. I think I can get more out of the 7.62 x 54r. The 8mm seems to have a little more drop down range

WSNFL

USSR
August 12, 2005, 07:43 AM
Actually, the 8x57JS and 7.62x54R are inherently as accurate or more accurate than the .308.

Actually, cartridges in and of themselves are not "inherently accurate". Certain cartridges have a "reputation for accuracy" due to the fact that many well-made rifles were chambered for that cartridge, and quality ammo was made for that cartridge.

Don

dfaugh
August 12, 2005, 08:22 AM
What no one has seemed to mention is the ammo you're talking about. Both cartridges can be very accurate, as can the more common chamberings they're available in. However, I've yet to see any milsurp ammo that came close to the accuracy of good commercial and especially handloads in any of my Mosins or Mausers. The best milsurp ammo I've see was Czech "Silvertip" in 7.62x54R...Have yet to find any 8mm that would shoot better than 3" groups. But in the same gun (Scoped and bedded/restocked Mauser, but unmodified action w/ military barrel) I've shot 1 1/4" groups with commercial ammo, and right around 1" with handloads, whichisn't all that much different from an OK commercial rifle off the shelf. still playing with it trying to get it better. And A guy I meet up with, often, at the range, has an original Finnish sniper that shoots 3/4" groups all day long often better, but again this is with commercial ammo.

In short, IMHO, 8x57, 7.62x54R, 30-06, 308 (and a host of similar cartridges) all have a relatively similar accuracy potential. If you could eliminate ALL the variables, I doubt you'd find much difference in accuracy, beteen any of them.

Apache
August 12, 2005, 11:09 AM
I'd post that the 7.62-54r round is the better. Again it depends on the shooter and the rifle. My late Finnish mother owned a mdl.91 longer than her
height.She was a guerrilla in the war with the Stalin soviet invation of FINNLAND. She could see what was happening to the Ukraine,by Stalins' leadership. Fake famines,murders, explosions,and vowed never to let that happen in Finland. It would be an understatement, that she hated all governments. It's no accident that the Finnish rifles were the widow makers
of WWII. They were refitted by either Finnland concerns like Tikka or shipped to Germany for headspace,new barrels,etc. She told me to save my money when I was going to send her rifle to the gunsmith for a scope. "I'm completely satisfied with it, so forget that plan!" I've two Finn rifles from that
era. one's a Tikka,the other a dragoon. Not necessarily for sale, but if I can manage to post pictures-they'll make a good reference!

Commissar Gribb
August 12, 2005, 12:02 PM
i'm no expert on ammo but...

methinks that in a day and age where x 54R is only really used in machine guns (ala the PKM etc.) that it would be difficult to find ammunition for it that is designed for precision shooting.

It would be interesting to see how much you could improve the round with boat tails and reloads (assuming you find some reloadable ammo for x 54R)

Cosmoline
August 12, 2005, 01:12 PM
Apache--your mother was a member of the Lotta Savard?! What ever became of her M-91? Are you sure it wasn't an M-24 "lotta" rifle? Some of those had new German and Swiss barrels put on. They're extremely valuable. Please post photos if you've got them.

db_tanker
August 12, 2005, 01:14 PM
Commissar,

I would love to answer you...but I have been too lazy to do anything with my stuff...My Finn M-39 Sako hasn't seen daylight in more than a few moons. :(

But my plan is to take it, and use the same batch of brass, primer and bullet...then use 5 diffrent powders...3 ball and 2 stick.

Did the same with my custom 98/22 308 and found her sweet spot.

Right now, in Texas, its just too friggin' hot to sit out there and work those rounds...and when your throwing powder, you don't really want a fan going.
:(

But I DO know that with S&B factory loads, 6" gongs at 150-200 yards don't stand still...same even with Wolf. I stay away from surplus due to it being corrosive for the most part.

Mike Hull
August 12, 2005, 01:36 PM
Apache--your mother was a member of the Lotta Savard?! What ever became of her M-91? Are you sure it wasn't an M-24 "lotta" rifle? Some of those had new German and Swiss barrels put on. They're extremely valuable. Please post photos if you've got them.


Yes, Apache, very interesting bit of family history. Thanks! :D

Dr.Rob
August 12, 2005, 04:13 PM
As far as the RIFLES go, the Mauser bolt is a LOT faster than the Mosin.

Scopes of that era are primitive by today's standards but they certainly worked.

During WW2 there was no such thing as "match grade" 7.62x54R... nor was specialty ammo set aside for most 'snipers' on either side.

Both cartidges are well suited to shooting long range. if you could roll your own with a custom rifle in each caliber (diffcult with the Russian stuff as I don't think I ever SEEN a brass 7.62x54R round) you'd no doubt have two very well matched calibers.

Cosmoline
August 12, 2005, 04:38 PM
There's a ton of good 7.62x54R boxer brass out there. You can get it from Lapua, Norma, S&B and Graf & sons, etc. I actually find it much easier to find 54R brass than good 8x57JS brass.

Dr.Rob
August 12, 2005, 07:11 PM
I stand corrected... looks like it's fairly available and some factory loadings were brass.

MachIVshooter
August 13, 2005, 01:51 AM
The Nagant and the K98 are both good rifles, but also don't overlook a good Lee-Enfield. The better models, especially No.4's, with 5 or 6 groove riflling shoot very well (stay away from 2-groove models). And, of course, the M1903 Springfield are excellent guns as well. I have a 1918 manufacture '03 and a 1942 Manufacture No.4 Mk1/3; both guns shoot very well. The '03 is probably the most pleasant to shoot of all the military bolt guns, even though the .30-06 is the most potent cartridge. My experiance has been that the recoil of both the Enfields and K98's is quite punishing for a moderate cartridge. The Nagant had a fairly sharp bite as well. OF course, the Swedish mausers in 6.5x55 and the Belgian 7x57's are a bit more plaesant to fire. Don't have any experience with the Carcanos, Mannlichers, Schmidt-Rubins or Arisakas.

Commissar Gribb
August 13, 2005, 03:54 AM
why is the MN always compared to the K98?

comparing a long rifle to a carbine isn't really as good as comparing say- the MN to the G98 or the mosin 44 to the k98k

Cpl Punishment
August 13, 2005, 07:43 AM
Actually, I know quite a few people who get excellent accuracy out of 2-groove Enfields. Of course I much prefer the 5 and 6-groove No4s.

why is the MN always compared to the K98?


Maybe they're the easiest to find, so that's what gets compared, I dunno. I know it's common to see a rackload of K98s, but G98s are few and far between in my neck of the woods.

Cosmoline
August 13, 2005, 03:53 PM
The K98k has a 23 inch barrel. It's only a "carbine" in the same European sense that a K-31 is a "carbine." In our terms, both are full size rifles. Certainly the extra barrel length of 27" or 31" on some Mosin Nagant models doesn't give them any huge accuracy advantage. Indeed, the long lean barrels on the Russian mosins are notoriously prone to stock interference. A shorter, stiffer barrel is going to be more accurate.

As far as recoil, you just have to learn how to hold the rifle properly. You can't shoot inon sighted war rifles the same way you shoot modern scoped hunting rifles.

jefnvk
August 13, 2005, 05:00 PM
The '03 is probably the most pleasant to shoot of all the military bolt guns, even though the .30-06 is the most potent cartridge. My experiance has been that the recoil of both the Enfields and K98's is quite punishing for a moderate cartridge

I'll take the Enfield any day, thank you much. Much less noticed kick to me, probably one of the more plesant guns to shoot, next to the Swede.

stolivar
August 14, 2005, 12:22 AM
I have a turk mauser that I bought for 29 bucks. I had it drilled and tapped with lowered safety and redfield mounts and nikon scope. This rifle will cloverleaf with 3 shot group at 100 yards easily. I handload for it with 150 gr sierra's and have dealt many a deers death at 200 yards. Very accurate gun for something that was made in 1938. I get 3000 fps out of the 29 inch barrel. Not counting the scope I have only 150 bucks in the gun.



steve

If you enjoyed reading about "Sniper round,Mauser vs Mosin Nagant" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!